ML20072R725: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
VisualWikitext
StriderTol Bot insert
 
StriderTol Bot change
 
Line 17: Line 17:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:- - - - .                     . .                _ _ _ _ - - -                                            _
{{#Wiki_filter:- - - -.
Congreggof thetEnitebhtes Mastington,D.C. 20515 1
Congreggof thetEnitebhtes Mastington,D.C. 20515 1
February 6, 1991 Honorable Kenneth Carr Chairman United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission                                                       <
February 6, 1991 Honorable Kenneth Carr Chairman United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
Washington, D.C. 20555


==Dear Mr. Chairman:==
==Dear Mr. Chairman:==
 
We are again writing to seek information concerning the quality of welds at the Seabrook station.
We are again writing to seek information concerning the quality of welds at the Seabrook station. The Commission's repeat 6d failures to address the central issues of the Congressional investigation necessitate this request.
The Commission's repeat 6d failures to address the central issues of the Congressional investigation necessitate this request.
Please provide the followingt A.       The specific procedure (s), if any, that governed the Yankee Atomic Electric Company's (YAEC's) purported 100%
Please provide the followingt A.
The specific procedure (s), if any, that governed the Yankee Atomic Electric Company's (YAEC's) purported 100%
review of radiograph packages, prior to April 1984.
review of radiograph packages, prior to April 1984.
B.       The Commission's position as to whether the procedure (s) referred to in Item A above complied with the requirement of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V.
B.
C.       The Commission's position with regard to whether the Seabrook licensee, in the conduct of the purported 100%
The Commission's position as to whether the procedure (s) referred to in Item A above complied with the requirement of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V.
C.
The Commission's position with regard to whether the Seabrook licensee, in the conduct of the purported 100%
review of radiographs, complied with the record keeping requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criteria XVI and XVII.
review of radiographs, complied with the record keeping requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criteria XVI and XVII.
D.       The Commission's position as to whether the Seabrook licensee, with regard to the purported 100% review of radiographs, complied with the audit requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B,-Criteria XVIII.
D.
E.       The Commission's explanation, in light of the contention that the purported 100% review was conducted throughout the duration           of                         pipe welding   activities, of   wny approximately 95% of welds reviewed by the NRC in its NUREG-1425 inspection showed YAEC approvals af ter Wampler arrived at the site.
The Commission's position as to whether the Seabrook licensee, with regard to the purported 100% review of radiographs, complied with the audit requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B,-Criteria XVIII.
F.       A   Commission                   statement                 providing   the   following information:
E.
: 1. The date when the NRC Region I staff first became aware of the purported 100% radiograph review by YAEC.
The Commission's explanation, in light of the contention that the purported 100% review was conducted throughout the duration of pipe welding activities, of wny approximately 95% of welds reviewed by the NRC in its NUREG-1425 inspection showed YAEC approvals af ter Wampler arrived at the site.
: 2. An explanation of any delay in the NRC becoming
F.
                              }         O                      Y
A Commission statement providing the following information:
1.
The date when the NRC Region I staff first became aware of the purported 100% radiograph review by YAEC.
2.
An explanation of any delay in the NRC becoming O
Y
}


r y                       .
r y
      . ;. p           !gg             ."
. ;. p
: = = .*-
!gg
              &Q ''     -
= =.*-
f 7                                                                                                                                                                                         ,
:&Q ''
b_                                                                                                                                                                                                          1
7 b_
                      - Hon.IKenneth-Carr                                                                                                                   February 6, 1991 aware of the purported 100% review and its role in assuring weld quality at Seabrook.
f 1
: 3. The-date'of the;first NRC inspection and/or SALP report which' described the role of the purported 100% review in assuring weld quality.                                                                       ,
- Hon.IKenneth-Carr February 6, 1991 aware of the purported 100% review and its role in assuring weld quality at Seabrook.
: 4. An explanation of the delay in , the -licensee's awareness of a large backlog of radiographs that had;                                                                                                       ,
3.
not been transmitted from the welding contractor to                                                                                                         t the licensee and how-this lack of knowledge can be                                                                                                           ,
The-date'of the;first NRC inspection and/or SALP report which' described the role of the purported 100% review in assuring weld quality.
explained in light of-the NRC's repeated claims that the- licensee maintained a 100%- review of all radiographs beginning - with the initiation of the-                                                                                                           ,
4.
pipe welding program.-
An explanation of the delay in, the -licensee's awareness of a large backlog of radiographs that had; t
G.           ' The Commission's explanation of why the NRC staff, in the
not been transmitted from the welding contractor to the licensee and how-this lack of knowledge can be explained in light of-the NRC's repeated claims that the-licensee maintained a 100%- review of all radiographs beginning - with the initiation of the-pipe welding program.-
                                                    = conduct ofLthe inspection' leading to NUREG-1425 failed                 -
G.
t'o-obtain information specified-in Items 4e, 4f, and.4g-of.the PLAN FOR TEAM INSPECTION AT-EEABROOK, reproduced in NUREG-1411,: Appendix 2.
' The Commission's explanation of why the NRC staff, in the
The NRC staff's initial decision to cease providing.Seabrook weld
= conduct ofLthe inspection' leading to NUREG-1425 failed t'o-obtain information specified-in Items 4e, 4f, and.4g-of.the PLAN FOR TEAM INSPECTION AT-EEABROOK, reproduced in NUREG-1411,: Appendix 2.
                        - documents that had to- be:~ obtained from the 0-licensee -causes us e'~                    considerable concern.                                                       The decision to cease < cooperation with
The NRC staff's initial decision to cease providing.Seabrook weld from the -licensee -causes us 0
                        -certain1 of our :: documents-- requests was apparently made .-without consulting >the= Commission.                                                     It was made'without a notification by the commission of the members who, on- April ~ 2,1990, requested that -
- documents that had to-be:~ obtained considerable concern.
                            "you-instruct the NRC staff to cooperate in this-endeavor so that-it is not necessary for us to become directly involved in requests for documents."
The decision to cease < cooperation with e'~
p                       - We againcwish to emphasize that we require such documents' in order -                                                                                                                             r to. fulfill our oversight responsibilities-and we expect continued cooperation from the Commission L and its. staff 'in . obtaining all l
-certain1 of our :: documents-- requests was apparently made.-without consulting >the= Commission.
necessary materials.
It was made'without a notification by the commission of the members who, on-April ~ 2,1990, requested that -
Please provide.the information requested-herein prior to
"you-instruct the NRC staff to cooperate in this-endeavor so that-it is not necessary for us to become directly involved in requests for documents."
    =                      February-22, 1991.
p
- We againcwish to emphasize that we require such documents' in order -
r to. fulfill our oversight responsibilities-and we expect continued cooperation from the Commission L and its. staff 'in. obtaining all necessary materials.
l Please provide.the information requested-herein prior to February-22, 1991.
=
s
s
                                                                                                            -Sincerely,                                                                           -
-Sincerely,
[                       f                               w         -
[
A c                                                                                                                                                    e
f w
: n. ! 4:
: n. ! 4: /h A
Kost ayer K_,.                             /h                                                                      M.
e c
O p
K_,.
                                                          ,                                            j                                                           ,        .
Kost ayer M.
Edward J.                     :arke                                           Nicholas Mavroules                                           John F. Kerry
p O
              #  4 ..r..r...,..,..     ,,.,._,,.m             ...-#,_m....-.,._m.m.,,.m.y,,,,,,,,,               ..,_,,,,m,,...y,,,m,,,mwo..,,m_.,,,,,,,.,,,,                 .,m.,,,,,., ,,,,,w.p.,,.,,,,,,,,.,,,%,,w}}
j Edward J.
:arke Nicholas Mavroules John F. Kerry 4
..r..r...,..,..
,,.,._,,.m
...-#,_m....-.,._m.m.,,.m.y,,,,,,,,,
..,_,,,,m,,...y,,,m,,,mwo..,,m_.,,,,,,,.,,,,
.,m.,,,,,.,
,,,,,w.p.,,.,,,,,,,,.,,,%,,w}}

Latest revision as of 04:25, 15 December 2024

Requests Info Re Quality of Welds at Facility
ML20072R725
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook  
Issue date: 02/06/1991
From: Erin Kennedy, Kerry J, Kostmayer P, Markey E, Mavroules N
CONGRESS (JOINT & ROTATING COMMITTEES, ETC.)
To: Carr K
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20070P788 List:
References
NUDOCS 9104040306
Download: ML20072R725 (3)
v • d • e


Text

- - - -.

Congreggof thetEnitebhtes Mastington,D.C. 20515 1

February 6, 1991 Honorable Kenneth Carr Chairman United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Chairman:

We are again writing to seek information concerning the quality of welds at the Seabrook station.

The Commission's repeat 6d failures to address the central issues of the Congressional investigation necessitate this request.

Please provide the followingt A.

The specific procedure (s), if any, that governed the Yankee Atomic Electric Company's (YAEC's) purported 100%

review of radiograph packages, prior to April 1984.

B.

The Commission's position as to whether the procedure (s) referred to in Item A above complied with the requirement of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V.

C.

The Commission's position with regard to whether the Seabrook licensee, in the conduct of the purported 100%

review of radiographs, complied with the record keeping requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criteria XVI and XVII.

D.

The Commission's position as to whether the Seabrook licensee, with regard to the purported 100% review of radiographs, complied with the audit requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B,-Criteria XVIII.

E.

The Commission's explanation, in light of the contention that the purported 100% review was conducted throughout the duration of pipe welding activities, of wny approximately 95% of welds reviewed by the NRC in its NUREG-1425 inspection showed YAEC approvals af ter Wampler arrived at the site.

F.

A Commission statement providing the following information:

1.

The date when the NRC Region I staff first became aware of the purported 100% radiograph review by YAEC.

2.

An explanation of any delay in the NRC becoming O

Y

}

r y

. ;. p

!gg

= =.*-

&Q

7 b_

f 1

- Hon.IKenneth-Carr February 6, 1991 aware of the purported 100% review and its role in assuring weld quality at Seabrook.

3.

The-date'of the;first NRC inspection and/or SALP report which' described the role of the purported 100% review in assuring weld quality.

4.

An explanation of the delay in, the -licensee's awareness of a large backlog of radiographs that had; t

not been transmitted from the welding contractor to the licensee and how-this lack of knowledge can be explained in light of-the NRC's repeated claims that the-licensee maintained a 100%- review of all radiographs beginning - with the initiation of the-pipe welding program.-

G.

' The Commission's explanation of why the NRC staff, in the

= conduct ofLthe inspection' leading to NUREG-1425 failed t'o-obtain information specified-in Items 4e, 4f, and.4g-of.the PLAN FOR TEAM INSPECTION AT-EEABROOK, reproduced in NUREG-1411,: Appendix 2.

The NRC staff's initial decision to cease providing.Seabrook weld from the -licensee -causes us 0

- documents that had to-be:~ obtained considerable concern.

The decision to cease < cooperation with e'~

-certain1 of our :: documents-- requests was apparently made.-without consulting >the= Commission.

It was made'without a notification by the commission of the members who, on-April ~ 2,1990, requested that -

"you-instruct the NRC staff to cooperate in this-endeavor so that-it is not necessary for us to become directly involved in requests for documents."

p

- We againcwish to emphasize that we require such documents' in order -

r to. fulfill our oversight responsibilities-and we expect continued cooperation from the Commission L and its. staff 'in. obtaining all necessary materials.

l Please provide.the information requested-herein prior to February-22, 1991.

=

s

-Sincerely,

[

f w

n. ! 4: /h A

e c

K_,.

Kost ayer M.

p O

j Edward J.

arke Nicholas Mavroules John F. Kerry 4

..r..r...,..,..

,,.,._,,.m

...-#,_m....-.,._m.m.,,.m.y,,,,,,,,,

..,_,,,,m,,...y,,,m,,,mwo..,,m_.,,,,,,,.,,,,

.,m.,,,,,.,

,,,,,w.p.,,.,,,,,,,,.,,,%,,w

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20072R725&oldid=4408401"